To link to the entire object, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed the entire object, paste this HTML in websiteTo link to this page, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed this page, paste this HTML in website

August 30, 1965
Mr. James Copland III
Coplands Inc.
Burlington, North Carolina
Dear Jim:
Thank you very much for your letter of August 16. I was very interested to see the Esquire articles concerning the "Hew Left Fraternity" and the "Berkeley underground." I took particular interest in the former article, as it was written by Fred Powledge, who was editor of the Daily Tar Heel in 1955. I see that Mr. Powledge has quite a gift for sarcasm, and I thought he used it well in describing the confused mentality of the student "leftists."
Frankly, I cannot agree with your feeling that the Chapel Hill campus shares intimately with Berkeley the problems and organizations which led to the unfortunate events of last winter. Insofar as the Esquire articles are concerned, for example, I noted with great interest the number of radical student groups described which are not active at Chapel Hill. According to the students and faculty members with whom I have talked, groups such as SNCC, the Fair Play for Cuba Committee ano the DuBois Clubs have never been organized at Chapel Hill.
I also feel that the impact and significance of such groups, even where they do exist, has been overly emphasized in attempts to explain upheavals such as the one at Berkeley. It seems to me that the so-called "student left" organizations in California took advantage of a situation which was basically unsound; they did not create the situation themselves. The tremendous size of the student body at Berkeley, coupled with a lack of adequate methods of communication between students, faculty, and administrators, served to create an open wound through which the "leftists" organizations entered to disease the entire University. Had the channels of communication and understanding been open the "leftists" student movements at Berkeley might well have remained in the same relative position there as at the vast majority of American

This item was digitized by the State Archives for the fiftieth anniversary of the Speaker Ban Law. The materials in this online collection are only a small sample of the materials available on this subject from the State Archives of North Carolina. To locate other available materials on the Speaker Ban Law, visit the Archives online catalog, MARS.

August 30, 1965
Mr. James Copland III
Coplands Inc.
Burlington, North Carolina
Dear Jim:
Thank you very much for your letter of August 16. I was very interested to see the Esquire articles concerning the "Hew Left Fraternity" and the "Berkeley underground." I took particular interest in the former article, as it was written by Fred Powledge, who was editor of the Daily Tar Heel in 1955. I see that Mr. Powledge has quite a gift for sarcasm, and I thought he used it well in describing the confused mentality of the student "leftists."
Frankly, I cannot agree with your feeling that the Chapel Hill campus shares intimately with Berkeley the problems and organizations which led to the unfortunate events of last winter. Insofar as the Esquire articles are concerned, for example, I noted with great interest the number of radical student groups described which are not active at Chapel Hill. According to the students and faculty members with whom I have talked, groups such as SNCC, the Fair Play for Cuba Committee ano the DuBois Clubs have never been organized at Chapel Hill.
I also feel that the impact and significance of such groups, even where they do exist, has been overly emphasized in attempts to explain upheavals such as the one at Berkeley. It seems to me that the so-called "student left" organizations in California took advantage of a situation which was basically unsound; they did not create the situation themselves. The tremendous size of the student body at Berkeley, coupled with a lack of adequate methods of communication between students, faculty, and administrators, served to create an open wound through which the "leftists" organizations entered to disease the entire University. Had the channels of communication and understanding been open the "leftists" student movements at Berkeley might well have remained in the same relative position there as at the vast majority of American